Adam,
Re: "Can someone post a summary of the dual-analyst discussion on Squawk Box this
morning?
Ashok Kumar (Piper-Jaffray) was asked to speak first. He was pro-Intel. Said the problems with 0.18, as with previous moves to newer, tighter geometry, often occur just as they are now. Bringing new geo. along is a gradual thing, and often the initial results (speed) are the same or not much better than with the previous technology. He wasn't asked, nor did he volunteer, any info about anything more serious than a "speed bump" with the new technology. He went on to say that Intel will "backfill" (I think it was Kumar that used that word) the missing 0.18 units with 600 MHz PIIIs made with 0.25. Said Intel's loss due to all this could be as much as $100 million in revs., which he called equiv. to a rounding error for them. He said (twice) he's a buyer of the stock on dips.
Cowen was negative (called himself neutral). He said it's a bigger, longer term problem of ASPs, and the market calling for the cheaper Celerons than the high end Intel chips. He said he expects Intel to have to work this out over two or three years. When Mark Haines asked if Intel is addressing the problem, he said (sit down if you're standing) "yes". The solutions for Intel, he said, were in the areas of cost control and diversification. He said Intel was doing this by promoting Craig Barrett, who comes from MFG (the cost part), and buying Level 1 (the diversification part).
I guess Mikey, I mean the street, likes it so far.
Tony |
